Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J.
Balla Ram - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous 2Nd Bail Application No. 5277 of 2021
Decided On : 05-08-2021
BAIL - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - The court granted bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. after considering the statements of witnesses which indicated that the petitioner did not cause the death of the victim. The court emphasized the need for a balanced approach in bail applications, allowing for the possibility of bail when the evidence does not directly implicate the accused in the fatal injury.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a second bail application while in custody for serious offences under IPC, including murder. The first bail application was denied pending witness statements.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the statements of key witnesses indicated that the petitioner did not inflict the fatal injury, suggesting a case of mutual combat rather than targeted violence.
Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted bail considering the nature of the charges and the evidence presented.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the absence of specific attribution of fatal injuries to the petitioner, along with the context of a free fight, warranted the granting of bail.
Result: The second bail application was allowed, and the petitioner was granted bail upon furnishing a personal bond and sureties.
JUDGMENT
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J. - The present 2nd bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with FIR No.146/2019, Police Station Kuchaman City District Nagaur for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 307 and 302 of IPC.
2. The first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed on 14.02.2020 by this Court with liberty to revive the prayer for bail after the statements of witnesses namely Bidami Devi & Surja Ram are recorded before the trial court.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Public Prosecutor as also learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the material available on record.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that after rejection of the first bail application, the statements of Bidami Devi (PW4) and Surja Ram (PW1) have been recorded. As per the statements of Bidami Devi and Surja Ram, it has been stated that the petitioner along with a number of persons inflicted the injuries upon the complainant party. He further submits that the petitioner party also sustained multiple injuries and injury reports of the same are on record. It is a case of free fight in which Bhanwar Lal suffered injuries and succumbed to the same. As per the statements of PW1 and PW4, the injuries assigned to the petitioner are not cause of death of Bhanwar Lal in the present case as no specific injury has been attributed to him. Therefore, it is prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. The counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the bail.
6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
7. Accordingly, the 2nd bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Balla Ram S/o Shri Choga Ram, shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.146/2019, Police Station Kuchaman City District Nagaur provided he furnishes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees: Fifty Thousand Only) with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees: Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Bail can be granted when the evidence does not directly link the accused to the commission of the fatal act, emphasizing the principle of presumption of innocence.
The court's decision was based on the consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, and the intention of the accused-petitioners in causing the injuries.
The Court considered the similarity of the petitioner's case to the co-accused who had been enlarged on bail and the exceptional circumstances due to the COVID-19 pandemic in granting bail under Sect....
The court may grant bail considering the length of the trial and the nature of the injuries alleged against the accused.
The court established that the nature of injuries and the duration of judicial custody are critical factors in determining the grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
The decision to grant bail was based on the similarity of the petitioner's case to that of the co-accused who had already been released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of the Court.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the circumstances of the case, including the stage of the trial and the likelihood of a prolonged trial.
The court has the discretion to grant bail to an accused under Section 439 Cr.P.C. based on the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
